A weakened Israel will not secure regional peace!

Yis'real Ne'eman provides an analysis of just what the Saudi Peace Plan entails in practical terms. In essence the Arab world, fearing Iran, is anxious to resolve their conflict with Israel on a basis that would leave Israel dependent upon Arab success overcoming its own fears and problems because Israel would have indefensible borders.

Furthermore, Israel would be expected to compensate Arabs for starting a war and losing. It would be as if the United States wound up paying compensation to Japanese citizens for bombing Pear Harbor.

Lastly, it is extremely difficult to realistically envision an Israel protected by Arab nations whose own survival is questionable but then Israel is a tiny nation, is blamed for all the problems of the world and the feckless west is always willing to sacrifice others in an heart beat because of their own cowardliness.

There needs to be a resolution of the Palestinian problem but making Israel the sacrificial lamb will only create problems down the road because a weakened Israel will not secure peace in the region. (See 1 below.)

The battle that erupted as the unity government is formed should be a warning. Also, now that Hamas is in control and the appearance of unity has been created expect the west to buckle and start funding terrorism again. I would also expect a weakened Bush administration that is falling apart to eventually cave as well and disavow the prefatory conditions of its own Road Map.

This is what is suggested by forcing Israel to negotiate a final settlement while the Palestinians refuse to recognize Israel, stop terrorism etc. Olmert is so weak he cannot withstand the pressure no matter his bold statements because Israel must eventually do the U.S.'s bidding. (See 2 and 3 below.)

If you think I am too harsh in judging Olmert then wait for the Winograd Reprt. (See 4 below.)

Our son and daughter-law attended the AIPAC meeting but I have yet to speak with him. I did receive an e mail from a former president of AIPAC who said it was a well attended conference, ie 6500 attendees. The problem with these conferences, in my humble opinion, is that you are told what you want to hear by speakers but it changes nothing because a weakened administration will do what it feels compelled to do to save its neck for historical reasons.

It is as if Israel is being nibbled to death by a duck!

What is more critical is who will follow Olmert and how long will it take to rid Israel of Olmert and the Kadima experiment? (See 5 below.)



Dick


1) Saudi Peace Initiative
By Yisrael Ne'eman

Suddenly the Saudi Initiative peace proposal of March 2002 (supported by the moderate Arab states Jordan, Egypt and the Emirates) has gained new momentum and is all the rage. The plan calls for a two state solution giving the Palestinians full sovereignty over the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem (to be its capital), a full Israeli withdrawal to the 1967 lines (incl. the Golan) and a solution to the Palestinian refugee problem as determined in UN Res. 194. In return the Arab world is to establish full diplomatic relations with Israel and guarantee security for all peoples and states in the region, including Israel.

Full Palestinian sovereignty infers the development of its own army, and not the establishment of a demilitarized or non-militarized state. With Netanya 9 miles (15 kilometers) from the West Bank city of Tulkarm, Israel's coastal population of several million would be in rocket range, including Tel Aviv in the end. Considering the outbreaks of anarchy in the Gaza Strip and the rocket fire faced by Israel, similar attacks could be expected to come out of the West Bank.

As for refugee issues, UN Res. 194 Article 11 (Dec. 1948) states the following: Refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliest possible date, and that compensation should be paid for the property which, under the principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible. One can rest assured that after almost 60 years of refugee status and the poisonous anti-Israel/anti-Semitic Palestinian education system that one would be hard pressed to find anyone willing to live at peace with their neighbors, meaning Israeli Jews. Therefore the issue would be compensation. But such a demand cuts both ways. Let us recall that there were approximately a million Jews who became refugees throughout the Middle East, whether due to the Arab invasion or as a result of the establishment of the State of Israel and backlash throughout the Arab world.

There are several reasons for the Saudi push at the moment. The "moderate" Arab world is petrified of Iranian Shi'ite influence and the inroads being made in organizations like Hamas. The thinking is that conflict resolution with Israel will undercut all the radicals including the Sunni Moslem Brotherhood of which Hamas is the Palestinian arm. Israeli return of the Golan to Syria would supposedly detach Damascus from both the Iranians and the Hezbollah, thereby weakening the former and seriously undermining the second. Hezbollah could be defeated by internal Arab world forces whether originating in Lebanon or not.

Israel would have peace with non-defensible borders. It appears that the Jewish State would not have to absorb Palestinian refugees but rather compensation would be negotiated. Being the Palestinians and Arab world rejected the two-state solution in 1947-48 they are the aggressors and should be responsible for compensating their own people. But they will certainly make demands on the Israeli treasury.

Israel is being asked to pay the price to strengthen the Arab world in its battles against Iran and Sunni extremists (Moslem Brotherhood and bin Laden's Al Qaeda). Israel is to relinquish strategic assets in return for peace and security. But will those making the promises keep their word? Better yet, will those moderate Arab regimes survive and not be overthrown by the Islamic extremists?

The Jewish State is being offered that very tempting concept "End of Conflict" with its inferred recognition of Jewish national legitimacy, at least in its declared form as part of a final agreement. But the price set is extremely high: dependence on the Arab World for Israel's continued existence, meaning not only the "moderates" must come out the winners in their battle against Islamic extremism, but the future of the Jewish State and People is dependent upon them keeping their word. To project into the future a generation or so, we are speaking of the Arab World as the new patron for the Zionist movement.

Many Israeli politicians on the Left, Center and even moderate Right are willing to enter negotiations with no pre-conditions. The Arab "moderates" are hinting that the initiative is unchangeable, meaning "Take it or leave it." The Clinton Outline (Dec. 2000), the Roadmap (2003) and Bush-Sharon Commitments (April 2004) are not mentioned.

Most agree that to talk will not hurt. Israelis need to keep in mind that the "moderates" in the Arab World are under pressure, for better and for worse and the Saudi initiative is not the last word. Israel needs peace with the Arabs, overall security and a continuing strategic relationship with the US while expanding its horizons to Europe. Whether all this can be achieved in tandem with the Arab World is the fundamental question.

2) Hamas gets 9 cabinet posts, Fatah six. The other portfolios are shared out among “independents” and smaller factions.

One putative “independent,” the designated foreign minister Ziyad Amar, is a known Hamas adherent. Pro-American Salam Fayed is retained as finance minister as bait to draw US recognition and international assistance.

Israel has announced it will boycott all the new ministers, including the new Fatah office-holders. The Olmert government faults Mahmoud Abbas for accepting a power-sharing accord dominated by Hamas, whose platform continues to deny Israel recognition and refuses to terminate violence. Abbas also reneged on his promise to get the kidnapped Israeli soldier Gilead Shalit released before forming a unity administration.

Abbas and Hamas prime minister Ismail Haniyeh (who retains the post) worked against the stopwatch to get their Saudi-brokered unity act together in time for the Riyadh Arab summit on March 28.

The fragility of their deal was apparent on the day of its signing: Wednesday, March 14, internecine gunfights were sparked by the assassination of Hamas’ Gaza commander Ala Haddad in a hail of bullets by the Muhammad Dahlan’s Fatah death squads. Whereas Haddad had been targeted for months by Fatah, now the chief of those death squads, a professional terminator called Samir Madhoun, became the quarry of Hamas’ special executive arm. Nine people were injured, including three bystanders, in the ensuing shoot-outs. The air rang with gunfire as Abbas and Haniyeh shook hands in Gaza City.

The cynical performance proceeded with Abbas pledging to deliver European recognition and aid funds to the new government, and Haniyeh vowing to end Palestinian government reliance on Iran - if Abbas delivered. Both promises were hollow, as they both knew, just as the framework they contrived changes very little. The kidnapped BBC reporter Alan Johnston and the Israeli soldier remain in the hands of a band of captors that includes al Qaeda-Gaza, Hamas continues to take delivery of missiles and other war materiel and build its fortified bunkers.

If anything, Abbas lost points; any agreements or deals he may conclude with Israel will be subject to ratification by the Palestinian national assembly which has a Hamas majority. But because the unity deal is in the bag, the Palestinians will be represented at the Arab summit this month by a Hamas prime minister.

3) Hamas: New gov't to respect previous accords, but back resistance

The new Palestinian unity government will "respect" previous agreements with Israel, as stated in the Mecca agreement that led to the formation of the government, but will also continue to support "resistance," according to excerpts from the new government's platform, published Thursday on two Hamas Web sites.

Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh of Hamas on Thursday presented the final list of his cabinet to Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, a day after the two agreed on the make-up of the new government, ending weeks of arguments over the candidate for the powerful interior ministry post.

"I have handed over to the president the candidates for the new coalition. He has accepted that, Haniyeh said. "We are optimistic the government will open a new era."


In the first Israeli response to the government's platform, a senior official called it a major step backward for peace prospects, and said Jerusalem would lobby the international community not to work with the new government.

The Quartet of Middle East peace brokers - the United States, European Union, United Nations and Russia - has called for the new PA government to abide by three demands: recognition of Israel, renunciation of violence and agreement to honor previous accords.

Haniyeh said Thursday, however, he has received signals that the Europeans are ready to work with his new government, but acknowledged that winning U.S. and Israeli support would be difficult.

"No doubt there is a different position by the American administration and the Israelis," he said. "We are going to do what we can to support national unity, and to remove the siege and to maintain relations with the international community."

The full cabinet line-up will be submitted Saturday for parliamentary approval.

According to Hamas, the new platform states that, "The government confirms that the resistance is a legitimate right for the Palestinian people."

It goes onto say that, "halting resistance depends on ending the occupation and achieving freedom and [the right of] return and independence."

Nonetheless the platform states, "The government abides by the protection of the higher national interests of the Palestinian people, and the protection of its rights ... on the basis of that, respects international resolutions and agreements signed by the PLO."

The new government, Hamas says, also recognizes that "the key to security and stability in the region is in the ending of the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land, recognition of the right to Palestinian self-determination."

To that end, the manifesto states, "the government will work with the international community to end the occupation, and to return the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people."

The platform also touches on one of the key sticking points in negotiations between the two sides - the issue of Palestinian refugees.

According to Hamas, the government "holds fast to the rights of Palestinian refugees, and the right of return of Palestinian refugees to their land and belongings."

But, said the Israeli official, "anyone who looks carefully at the document will see that there is a regression on a number of important issues."

He noted the platform's call for the return of Palestinian refugees to Israel and its affirmation of the Palestinian right of resistance against Israel.

The official, speaking on condition of anonymity because an official government statement has not been released, said the language is even tougher than the original Palestinian power-sharing deal reached in Mecca last month. "This is not a step forward, it is a step backward."

4) Winograd final report will 'sentence' country's leaders
By ANSHEL PFEFFER AND YAAKOV KATZ


The Winograd Commission's final report expected in the late summer will include full "personal recommendations" concerning Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Defense Minister Amir Peretz, as well as senior ministers and IDF officers on their conduct during the Lebanon War, a source close to the committee said Wednesday.

The "partial" report to be published next month will contain a full judgment on the actions of Olmert, Peretz and former chief of General Staff Dan Halutz during the five-day period in July between the capture of IDF reservists Eldad Regev and Ehud Goldwasser and the official decision to launch the campaign against Hizbullah.

Future recommendations regarding the three, however, will only appear in the final report.

The source called attention to the precise wording of the press announcement issued by the committee on Tuesday in which next month's report was referred to as a "partial" report rather than an "interim" report, as the media had called it.

This attests that the findings on the leaders' decision-making in the first five days following the kidnapping are complete, the source said. Therefore, the committee members decided to present that part of the report to the public without delay, including organizational recommendations arising from those findings.

Regarding the individuals involved - Olmert, Peretz and Halutz - the decision was to deliver the "verdict" as to their actions but to reserve the "sentencing" for the final report, which would describe their actions throughout the war. The source didn't discount the possibility that other parts of the report might be published in advance of the final version.

Meanwhile, a Web site reported Wednesday that Peretz had told members of the committee during his testimony that he made a mistake in accepting the post of defense minister.

According to the report on the News First Class site, Peretz told the committee members that he had initially wanted to be appointed finance minister, but Olmert had refused to grant him that portfolio and instead offered the Defense Ministry. The report further claimed that Peretz told the committee that in his opinion, a defense minister in Israel needed to have a strong military-defense background, which he does not.

Tuesday's announcement was made after intense consultations between committee members, who were eager to set the record straight after conflicting media reports on their intentions. Also, according to the source, the fact that Olmert's July 17 speech was chosen as the end of the time period to be scrutinized in the partial report is no coincidence, since "the prime minister will be spotlighted in the report."

In Jerusalem legal circles, there is a firm belief that committee member Prof. Ruth Gavison is the main influence on the writing of the report.

According to the announcement, the partial report will include a chapter explaining "the committee's understanding of the rules of natural justice," and the final report will contain analyses of "the relationship between the political and military echelons" and "the general ethos of Israeli society and the connection between it and the challenges facing the state."

Gavison is the only constitutional law expert on the panel and has dealt with such issues extensively over the years, both as an academic and a member of various public committees. Their inclusion is seen as a clear sign of her considerable influence on the committee.

Over the last week, there have been leaks from the offices of both Olmert and Peretz about both their explanations of the circumstances of Peretz's appointment as defense minister. The fact the committee saw that as a significant issue, even though the appointment isn't directly connected to the war or part of the committee's official purview, is another sign of Gavison's influence, as she has written extensively on the question of senior officials' discretion.

In related news, IDF Chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi told new recruits that although there had been problems during the Lebanon war, they were in training, and not in the units and their performance.

"There were problems during the war," Ashkenazi told soldiers who were drafted into the Kfir Brigade. "The problems were not in the units and the way they fought, but in the training. We are now fixing the problems and we have increased the training regimens."

5) Analysis: Livni and Netanyahu - prime ministers in waiting
By ANSHEL PFEFFER

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert addressed the annual AIPAC conference in Washington this week by video link from Jerusalem. Attending in person were two politicians who both believe they will be the next prime minister, and that their elevation is going to happen sooner rather than later.

Likud chairman Binyamin Netanyahu and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni both learned of the Winograd Committee's announcement that they would publish personal findings on Olmert next month, while they were still abroad, but their plans for the day after have been in place for some time. But despite their careful planning, both have to overcome some serious obstacles before they realize their objective.

Livni is ostensibly in the best position. As the official No. 2 in Kadima and Vice Premier, she would automatically take Olmert's place should he resign following the Winograd findings. The only problem with that scenario is that Olmert is unlikely to quit, even if he is severely criticized in the report, since the personal recommendations will only be published in the final report in another six months or more.

But can Livni afford to wait that long? Right now, she is the public's favorite candidate within Kadima, according to all the polls, and the darling of the international diplomatic scene and the media. This could be her best chance. Livni has at least three potential rivals for the Kadima leadership, Transportation Minister Shaul Mofaz, Construction and Housing Minister Meir Sheetrit and Internal Security Minister Avi Dichter. If she delays now, their nascent campaigns could have time to get off the ground.

The polls show that at the grassroots level, Kadima members favor Livni to replace Olmert, but the year-old party has no mechanism for replacing its leader, other than his resignation. To achieve this, Livni will have to execute some very deft political maneuvers to prove to Olmert that he has lost his party's confidence.

She will need to cut a deal with at least one of her rivals, preferably Mofaz or Dichter because of their security cachet, to ensure her ascendancy and continued control of the party. Above all, she will need a perfect sense of timing. She should bear in mind an interesting anniversary that falls next month. Just when retired Tel Aviv District Court judge Eliahu Winograd will be publishing his report, it will be 10 years since then-attorney general Elyakim Rubinstein presented his report on the Bar-On/Hebron affair, in which he severely criticized prime minister Netanyahu but decided not to indict him.

Netanyahu's bitter rival, finance minister Dan Meridor had threatened to resign over the scandal, but got cold feet at the last moment. His resignation at that point would have definitely triggered Netanyahu's downfall. Instead, three months later, Netanyahu turned the tables on Meridor and forced him out of the Treasury by siding against him with the Bank of Israel over currency conversion policy. Meridor never returned to the cabinet table, while Netanyahu remained in power for another two years. Livni will have learned from Meridor's political demise that sometimes you only get one chance.

Netanyahu feels that the premiership is once again within his grasp. The polls are smiling upon him even more than they are at Livni. He is by far the most popular candidate for the top job right now and the Likud under his leadership is once again polling above thirty seats.

The only problem is that elections don't have to be held for another three and a half years and even if Winograd proves to be an earthquake for the government, none of the parties in the government has any interest in going back to the public so soon. Even if Kadima's and Labor's leaders are replaced, the parties will make every possible effort to keep the coalition together.

Netanyahu's alternative to elections is forming a new coalition that supports him as prime minister, but even if all the center-right parties could be persuaded to join his new administration, Netanyahu would still need defectors from Kadima to complete his parliamentary majority, and since by law, defectors can join a coalition only if at least a third of the original faction breaks away, Netanyahu will have to entice at least 10 Kadima MKs.

There are at least twice this number of parliamentarians within the ruling party close to total disillusionment, but that doesn't mean that any of them are ready to get into bed with Netanyahu. Some of them left the Likud a year ago precisely because they didn't want to be in the same party with him. A third of the electorate, according to the polls, might believe that Netanyahu is the best man for the top job, but career politicians need a lot more than that to persuade them.

Kadima lawmakers' biggest worry right now, in light of their party's abysmal standing in the polls, is that they won't be coming back after the next election. To recruit them, Netanyahu would have to guarantee them safe places in the next Likud list, but to do that for at least 10 MKs who "betrayed" Likud not so long ago, at the expense of loyal Likud candidates, would be to invite open rebellion within a party that Netanyahu has worked so hard to bring under his control. Things are going to have to get a lot worse in Kadima for 10 MKs to leave the party in return for anything less than ironclad promises.